---2049402039-1681331018-1160005768
5444
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-2049402039-1681331018-1160005768=:15444"

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

---2049402039-1681331018-1160005768
5444
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Hi --

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Marcin Mielży©ßDski wrote:

> oinkoink wrote:
>
>> The problem is that the tutorial suggests that objects which have
>> already been created before a class is modified are affected
>> differently from objects which are created after the class is modified.
>> 
>
> Ok, let's put it another way. Modifying a class doesn't change two thins
> - instance variables of existing objects
> - anything that is stored in singleton/eigen/meta/whatever class
>

It does if the class being changed is a singleton class :-)  But
anyway...the point is that the tutorial is misleading, because, as
oinkoink points out, it suggests that existing objects and future
objects relate differently to the class (see the "but" in the middle
of the sentence, in particular; whatever terms are being used
["changed", "affected", etc.], there's clearly a contrast being
suggested).


David

-- 
                   David A. Black | dblack / wobblini.net
Author of "Ruby for Rails"   [1] | Ruby/Rails training & consultancy [3]
DABlog (DAB's Weblog)        [2] | Co-director, Ruby Central, Inc.   [4]
[1] http://www.manning.com/black | [3] http://www.rubypowerandlight.com
[2] http://dablog.rubypal.com    | [4] http://www.rubycentral.org
---2049402039-1681331018-1160005768
5444--
---2049402039-1681331018-1160005768
5444--